| Revision as of 02:38, 19 September 2006 editLinaMishima (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,419 edits →[]: returning briefly to comment← Previous edit | Revision as of 06:37, 19 September 2006 edit undoKappa (talk | contribs)36,858 edits →[]: skNext edit → | ||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
| * '''Delete''' Already merged, and a lack of apparent references prevents proper verification. As much as it's novel and interesting, it's nature means it's an end-tool rather than something future works build upon. ] 02:38, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | * '''Delete''' Already merged, and a lack of apparent references prevents proper verification. As much as it's novel and interesting, it's nature means it's an end-tool rather than something future works build upon. ] 02:38, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | ||
| *Speedy keep, already merged. ] 06:37, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 06:37, 19 September 2006
ALPACA programming language
This article was part of the mass AfD of "Esoteric Programming languages overturned by DRV here. It is being relisted for individual consideration. All these languages will be relisted, at five/day to prevent congestion. This is a procedural nomination, so I abstain. Xoloz 14:39, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- Comment There have been many previous esoteric programming language-related AfDs, often with mass nominations. Not all of the following will be relevant, but many may be.
- Delete, no demonstrated notability.--Isotope23 20:01, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Notable for being one of relatively few computer languages dedicated to cellular automata, let alone CA languages that are as powerful as this. Indeed, the article doesn't do ALPACA justice - we should expand it to give a much wider view of ALPACA's features, and link to it from the cellular automaton page. I can imagine people coming to it looking for languages used to specify the things. -- Smjg 21:52, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
|
Dates shown are the date on which the debate started.
Previous Esoteric programming language-related deletion debates:
|
- Delete Already merged, and a lack of apparent references prevents proper verification. As much as it's novel and interesting, it's nature means it's an end-tool rather than something future works build upon. LinaMishima 02:38, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
- Speedy keep, already merged. Kappa 06:37, 19 September 2006 (UTC)